New Creation and Inheritance: Inclusion and Full Participation in Paul's Letters to the Galatians and Romans

Home , Galatians 3

New Creation and Inheritance: Inclusion and Full Participation in Paul’s Letters to the Galatians and Romans Caroline Schleier Cutler

A common theme in biblical narrative and prophetic literature terminology of the sonship metaphor to show how women and is that God aligns with those whom Walter Brueggemann calls slaves are also given the privileged status of sons and heirs. the “dispossessed, that is, those denied land, denied power, denied In Christ place or voice in history.”1 The dispossessed can also be defined as those who do not receive an inheritance, or who do not receive In Gal 3:23–4:7, the phrase en Christō Iēsou (“in Christ Jesus”) an inheritance unless someone else acts on their behalf. Thus, is central, occurring in 3:26 where it relates to how we are sons in an ironic twist, God ensures that it is the dispossessed who (“children” in NRSV) of God, and in 3:28 where it defines our become the heirs, the meek who inherit the earth (cf. Matt 5:5). oneness as believers. It also occurs earlier in 3:14, where it is the In Paul’s epistles to the Galatians and Romans, the themes means by which the Gentiles receive “the blessing of Abraham.” of adoption and inheritance are prominent, particularly in Gal The phrase “in Christ Jesus” does not occur in Rom 8:14–25. 3:23–4:7 and Rom 8:14–25. In Rom 4:13, the true descendants of However, it does occur in Rom 8:1–2 and 8:39, thus framing Abraham are promised that they “would inherit the world.” This the chapter with references to the reality that in Christ we are denotes an inheritance that is substantial—even cosmic—in its no longer under condemnation (8:1),3 and to the reality of God’s proportions. It is an inheritance closely tied to the concept of love for us in Christ Jesus (8:39). These passages work together “new creation” (Gal 6:15), which is central to Paul’s thinking. to show that being in Christ is requisite for the members of his In examining these inheritance texts in Galatians and Romans church. In fact, according to Beverly Roberts Gaventa, it is “the it is necessary to address two questions: Who inherits? and What first and most important thing to be said about us,” as seen in kind of inheritance do they receive? Some have suggested that Gal 3:28.4 It means that there are no more barriers between Jews these passages—especially Gal 3:28—are to be interpreted solely and Gentiles, slaves and free persons, and males and females.5 in terms of salvation. However, the Galatian and Roman letters It means there is now a radical inclusiveness which is possible present ample evidence that inheritance goes beyond soteriology because the faith community “is no longer defined by physical (the work of Christ) to encompass social and ecclesiological fatherhood.”6 Significantly, in both Galatians and Romans, being issues as well. Indeed, it has the potential to impact every area in Christ also impacts our everyday lives because the truth that of the Christian life and even the whole of creation. The context we are in Christ is lived out in us.7 of Galatians is crucial for this interpretation of Gal 3:28 and its All-Inclusiveness surrounding discussion of inheritance. The context of Paul’s Several indicators confirm that the message of Gal 3–4 applies account of the Antioch incident in Gal 2:11–14 sets the stage for to all. One is the word pantes (“all”) which occurs in Gal 3:26 how Gal 3:28 is to be understood and, moreover, how to apply it and 3:28. What is emphasized in 3:26 is that Gentiles have in the twenty-first century. already become sons of God.8 The clear link between Gal 3:26 By framing Gal 3:28 as a discussion of inheritance Paul shows and 3:28 shows that every believer, female and male, is a child that all are included, whether male or female, and regardless of of God.9 Moreover, because sons are heirs, the all-inclusiveness ethnicity or socioeconomic status. The contexts of the two texts also applies to inheritance (Gal 4:7, Rom 8:17). However, God’s demonstrate two important features of inheritance: its inclusive generous redemptive activity moves even beyond the adoption nature and its participatory nature. These texts pave the way for of believers as sons who inherit to expansively encompass all of women as well as men to be included as full participants who God’s creation (Rom 8:22–23).10 work together in Christ for the kingdom of God. Although land is the typical OT concept of inheritance, Paul’s Paradoxical Language it can also effectively represent God’s inheritance in the NT. Since my argument is that the inheritance texts in Galatians Brueggemann notes, “Land is for sharing with all the heirs of the and Romans promote the full inclusion and participation of all, covenant, even those who have no power to claim it. Something whether male or female, it is necessary to briefly address the about land makes one forget them, makes one insensitive to issue of the non-inclusive language used by Paul, such as huios them.”11 The dispossessed are prevented from receiving a full (“son”) and huiothesia (“adoption as sons”). There is a paradox inheritance and need the Father whose “good pleasure” (Luke here—one that Paul seems to put forward intentionally. The very 12:32) it is graciously to give us the kingdom inheritance.12 fact that he is using exclusive terminology and then describing Through the process of adoption, slaves become sons of the inclusivity, the removal of barriers to inheritance in Gal 3:28, Father and are then identified as heirs (Gal 4:7, Rom 8:15–17).13 makes the inclusive statement all the more impactful. As Sandra Gentiles and Jews alike have a claim to this promised Polaski notes, “The grammar may be gender-exclusive, but the inheritance, for they are deemed “Abraham’s offspring” (Gal image it invites us to imagine reaches beyond generic sameness 3:29).14 The inclusive nature of inheritance is brought out by the to a celebration of diverse mutuality.”2 Paul thus uses the exclusive fact that all—male and female—have the same “legal status of son” in God’s presence and that this status includes inheritance.15

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 • 21 Notably, Gal 3:28 is framed by the language of heirs and inheritance declaring that this passage is central to the message of Galatians (3:18, 29, 4:1, 7). Moreover, Rom 8:17 proclaims that we, as God’s and had social and ecclesiological implications for those who children, are “heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.” embraced the good news of Jesus Christ.29 The actions of Peter The matter of what the inheritance looks like is also central and those who followed in his footsteps resulted in the excluded to this discussion. N. T. Wright observes that, in Rom 8, the land Gentiles being viewed as “at best second-class citizens in the new inheritance has become the entire redeemed cosmos—the new community.”30 For Paul, this was a crucial issue tied to the good creation.16 Daniel Kirk aptly designates this as a “new creation news of Jesus Christ. inheritance.”17 The basis for this understanding of inheritance as The heart of the matter was that Jews and Gentiles were the whole creation is in Rom 4:13: “For the promise that he would once again being separated into two groups.31 The gospel was inherit the world did not come to Abraham or to his descendants therefore at risk and Paul was concerned—even furious—enough through the law but through the righteousness of faith” (NRSV). to confront Peter publically (Gal 2:14).32 This was clearly notonly Abraham’s true descendants are to inherit the world.18 This is, a spiritual issue but one that impacted church life. It applies to the indeed, a generous, expansive inheritance. Jew/Gentile pair but also has unmistakable relevance for the other Jews and Gentiles two pairs of Gal 3:28 (slave/free, male/female). Daniel Boyarin astutely poses the following question: “If Paul took ‘no Jew or The issue of Jewish and Gentile relations within the church Greek’ as seriously as all of Galatians attests that he clearly did, is central in both Galatians and Romans. It is particularly how could he possibly—unless he is a hypocrite or incoherent— significant because Paul considers his calling and mission to be not have taken ‘no male and female’ with equal seriousness?”33 to the Gentiles.19 The primary concern for him is for Gentiles to Unified table fellowship was essential to Paul. By his be included in God’s people.20 response to Peter in Gal 2:11–14, he showed that “he knew of A major problem to be confronted in the Galatian church is the meal’s power to work for the integration of differences.”34 that the Jews were treating the Gentiles “as second-class citizens Hal Taussig describes the concept of table fellowship in early in the church.”21 The context for this treatment, according to F. church congregations as a “social experiment” where they used F. Bruce, is the historical “cleavage between Jew and Gentile.”22 a common cultural phenomenon to bring about a re-visioning Wayne Meeks points out another critical issue for Paul—that of community in terms of gender, ethnicity, status and religion.35 both Gentiles and Jews without Christ are viewed by Paul as This practice gave access to a common table for many who would being enslaved and are therefore both outsiders.23 not usually have shared a meal.36 For Paul, Christian unity was The solution for Paul is reconciliation between Jewish and unavoidably linked to who was willing to eat together.37 In turn, Gentile followers of Christ.24 This reconciliation is brought about the context of the table fellowship discussion in Gal 2 has an by a God who “shows no partiality” between Jews and Gentiles impact on how Gal 3:28 is interpreted. “Paul clearly intended 3:28 (Rom 2:11).25 Both Jews and Gentiles can now be the sons of to prohibit excluding Gentiles as a group from any privilege or God26 who is the Father of both.27 This all can happen through position in the church,” and they were to be treated as equals and the adoption of both Jews and Gentiles as children of God. welcomed to the table.38 If this is the case for Gentiles, we can Marianne Meye Thompson observes that this adoption is “now conclude that this would also apply to the other groups addressed expressed in the language of family and inheritance, and testifies in Gal 3:28, including male and female. to God’s faithfulness to the Jews, the children of Abraham, and Circumcision or Baptism? God’s mercy to the Gentiles, also the children of Abraham.”28 Thus, through the love and mercy of God, Gentiles and Jews can Another matter connected with the Jew/Gentile issue is whether have true unity and the promise of God’s inheritance. circumcision or baptism is the preferred entrance ritual into the The Antioch Incident and Table Fellowship Christian community. The Galatian and Roman epistles illustrate that Paul overwhelmingly favors baptism over circumcision for Related to the Jew/Gentile issue, whether members of divergent several reasons. groups can come together at a common meal is crucial for a study Circumcision physically marks off people into distinctive of inclusive inheritance in Galatians and Romans. This question groups, whereas with baptism such markers no longer play a part.39 is well demonstrated in the Antioch incident Paul recounts to Circumcision therefore takes believers backwards because they are the Galatians. Paul’s description of this event helps clarify the unnecessarily trying to fulfill the law.40 The rite of circumcision nature of the inheritance he later addresses in Gal 3:26–4:7. Two also excludes and overlooks women,41 whereas baptism is inclusive essential characteristics of the inheritance are its inclusiveness and makes way for “full participation” of both women and Gentiles and its breadth; it relates not only to salvation—as some would in the faith community.42 claim—but impacts who we are and what we do, including what However, Paul’s most convincing line of reasoning against happens in the church of Christ. It is this dynamic renewing circumcision as an entrance rite to Christian community is almost nature of the inheritance that indicates that it is a new creation certainly the new creation argument in Gal 6:15: “For neither inheritance. circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation In Gal 2:11–14, Paul tells of a conflict with Cephas (Peter) at is everything!” (NRSV). This concept is foundational to Paul’s Antioch because Peter has ceased eating with Gentiles. This clearly letter to the Galatians.43 In the new creation, women and men have is of great consequence to Paul. Scholars are nearly unanimous in equal access and space is made for them to participate together.

22 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 Maternal Imagery and the Obsolescence of Patrilineal meaningful way showing the birth pains to be worthwhile and Genealogy productive.60 There is a noticeable movement in Galatians and Romans away Gaventa proposes that Paul uses the maternal metaphor, as he from a system of genealogy that is dependent on male biology to does other metaphors, to persuade his readers to consider things in one that is God-centred. Paul uses imagery of matrilineal descent a new way so that they will change their minds about something.61 and adoption to emphasize this God-centeredness. He is fostering an intimate relationship with his audience.62 I Traditionally, to be a descendent of Abraham meant male suggest that he also has another objective in Galatians and Romans: descent passed on from father to son.44 Both Gal 3:23–4:745 and by using gender-inclusive metaphors, Paul is emphasizing the Rom 8:14–2546 have background material in which Abraham inclusivity of the good news of adoption, inheritance and new is identified as the progenitor of the line to which all believers creation for all, regardless of whether they are male or female. belong. However, in neither case is this lineage shown to be Gender Inclusiveness and the Far-Reaching Impact of determined physically.47 There is a redefinition of the phrase in Galatians 3:28 Gal 3:16 and Rom 4:13, Abraam . . . tō spermati autou (“Abraham’s The words of Gal 3:28—“There is no longer Jew or Greek, there seed”), which is in the person of Christ, giving rise to a “strictly is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; christo-centric spermatology.”48 Male genealogy is truly on its for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (NRSV)—are considered a way out in terms of the faith community. Both Jews and Gentiles powerful statement of equality and “border-transgressing unity” have their genealogy reconfigured away from male descent.49 for all, including women.63 Klyne Snodgrass calls this text “the Christ has brought about the obsolescence of patrilineal lineage. most socially explosive statement in the New Testament.”64 These With this shift in focus away from male descent, Paul uses assessments are not overly extravagant; Paul’s declaration has the several images which incorporate the idea of matrilineal genealogy. potential to revolutionize Christian life. One reason for this is that, in first-century culture, power over the It is essential to emphasize that Paul framed this verse in the family line is held by the father and the concept of matrilineal language of inheritance.65 A question then to be asked is: What descent would be seen as a subversive reversal.50 In Gal 4:21–31, in does Gal 3:28 tell us about what an heir is and what an heir inherits? the context of his allegorical comparison of Hagar and Sarah, Paul Paul is using this passage to widen the scope of who is considered contrasts “non-biological motherhood as children of ‘promise’”51 an heir—Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female. with what he describes as a biological parentage—being “born Additionally, from the context of the Antioch incident in Gal 2, according to the flesh”—equated to enslavement (Gal 4:23 NRSV; it is evident that the inheritance cannot be limited to something cf. 4:25, 29–31). Of primary importance in Paul’s writings is the that is only soteriological and has no relevance for practical and fact that “Jesus’ story is a narrative of matrilineal descent.”52 It is ecclesiological matters. not the anatomy of the male that determines human destiny, but Typical of the perspective that Gal 3:28 has only to do with rather our adoption in Christ—the true Seed—by the Father.53 salvation is S. Lewis Johnson Jr. who maintains that this text In overturning the old model of genealogy, the apostle Paul’s exclusively concerns a person’s “spiritual status in Christ.”66 While argument is always focused on the good news in Christ. This no one would deny that Gal 3:28 has a spiritual meaning, to limit it good news allows for and, indeed, calls for an overturning of to this aspect raises serious concerns.67 Several contextual reasons patriarchy and the narrow definition of male descent. Concerning make it impossible to interpret Gal 3:28 purely soteriologically this, Brigitte Kahl observes the following: “In his rereading with no social implications.68 of the Genesis story in Galatians 3–4 Paul develops a concept One key point is that women and slaves in Israel were already of fatherhood and motherhood that could be a nightmare to considered part of the covenant community, so Paul would have anyone interested in ‘orderly’ patriarchal categories and cultural been declaring nothing new if he was only talking about coming practices.”54 Since inheritance is so closely tied to genealogy, the to faith.69 Similarly, there were no expectations that being male or shift is therefore from an inheritance that is narrow and rigid to free was a requirement to be a follower of Christ, but there were one that is wide and inclusive. problems with the Jew/Gentile question.70 In fact, because of his There are other examples of mother imagery in Romans and calling to the Gentiles, Paul was especially focused on the issue of Galatians. Mother and birth terms stand out as dominant in Gal ethnicity, although he certainly took the other pairs seriously.71 4,55 including a maternal metaphor that Paul uses of himself. In Clearly, Gal 3:28 has not eradicated distinctions.72 For Gal 4:19, the apostle addresses the Galatians as “my little children, example, hierarchical human structures continue despite what for whom I am again in the pain of childbirth until Christ is Paul has announced. However, while these distinctions still formed in you” (NRSV). This metaphor identifies Paul with exist, the words of Gal 3:28 level out “values and structural women56 and would therefore have been a humbling image for norms imposed on these distinctions.”73 Johnson, perceiving the him to use of himself.57 It is therefore quite an unexpected and existence of role distinctions within the church, asks whether noteworthy occurrence.58 “distinction of roles of believers within that equality necessarily In Rom 8:22, Paul—once again notably59—uses a maternal violates that equality.”74 In response, Philip Payne comments, metaphor in the midst of his inheritance and adoption “If such distinctions of roles are based on the gifts and callings discussion, when he announces that “the whole creation has of individual believers, they would not violate that equality.” been groaning in labor pains until now.” The surrounding However, exclusion based on whether one is female or male would context in Rom 8:18–25 highlights the hope of new creation in a certainly harm that equality.75

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 • 23 24 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 • 25 Clearly, the truth of Gal 3:28 impacts not only spiritual status, ministry and leadership in any way, one risks flouting the Pauline but also social status and relationships. This is certainly the teaching on the proper practice of spiritual gifts in 1 Cor 12:7.88 case in Paul’s response to Peter at Antioch over table fellowship. For Payne, recalling the context of the Galatian epistle and the This incident indicates that his goal for the churches of Christ narrative of the Antioch incident gives further rationale for is “complete social integration.”76 With the reconfiguring of encouraging women to use whatever leadership and ministry relationships, patriarchal modes of encounter must also be gifts they might have: “Galatians 2:11–14 shows how strongly challenged, and “no structures of dominance can be tolerated” any Paul would have reacted if anyone had used ‘role distinctions’ to longer.77 This also means there were consequences, not only for exclude Gentiles or slaves from leadership roles in the church.”89 women, but for men who adopted Paul’s new paradigm. If they Those who promote limitations on women’s ministry would were free men, they would likely have to give up honor in order to thereby also restrict the preaching of the gospel. In response to foster equality with others—something remarkable for that time.78 this, Susie Stanley justifiably wonders if we can “separate the Paul, in describing new creation to the Corinthians, declares good news of the gospel from the fact that the ‘freedom found in that “if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything Christ’ includes the freedom for all believers, men and women, old has passed away; see, everything has become new!” (2 Cor to share that good news?”90 It is inconceivable that Paul would 5:17 NRSV, emphasis added). It is worthwhile noting that, want to restrict the preaching of his beloved gospel in any way as in Gal 3:28, he also uses “in Christ” (en Christō) language (cf. Phil 1:15–18). here. It is also significant that he uses the word “everything” Paul himself fully embraced not only Gentiles but slaves and twice, highlighting the reality that new creation impacts all of women in all areas of church life and ministry.91 He was able to life. Therefore, by restricting the scope of Gal 3:28 to only the apply the truth of Gal 3:28, that there was no longer male and spiritual, Johnson offers a woefully limited inheritance which female, in his own life and ministry.92 does not fit with the concept of the full, new creation inheritance All of this evidence points to the full inclusion of women that Paul depicts in his writings. in the church. Women, as well as men, are welcomed not only Full Participation in Church Life as members of the faith community but as participants wholly dedicated to the good news of Christ and working together for Proper application of Gal 3:28 would allow for women to God’s kingdom.93 participate fully in the life of the church. Any limitations would New Creation and Ethics in Galatians 3:28 detract from the verse’s ideal intention for the church. There are parallels for Gal 3:28 at Col 3:11 and 1 Cor 12:13.79 In both of these, In both Galatians and Romans, Paul reveals how God is doing practical matters of church life are addressed.80 The male/female a new thing in providing adoption and inheritance to those in pair only occurs in Gal 3:28, which is noteworthy because it could Christ.94 It is therefore not surprising that we find evidence of have been left out but was not.81 All indications are that this text new creation in Gal 3:28. This is indicated by the phrase arsen kai was intended to have significant ecclesiological consequences thēlu (“male and female”) which is also used in the Septuagint for women—that is, in terms of who the people of God are and of Gen 1:27 and pertains to the first creation in Genesis and the how they interact with each other in the practical life of the new creation in Gal 3:28.95 Payne describes how this new creation church.82 This would make sense, for Paul was speaking to and looks in terms of Gal 3:28: about women, as members of the Galatian congregations, about Central to this new creation is the new “Israel of God” baptism—the rite of entry into the faith community. His concern (Gal 6:16) that gives no privileged status to Jews over would be how this faith community lived out their faith. Gentiles, to free persons over slaves, or to men over The practicality of this Pauline saying is also unmistakable women. They are all one in Christ Jesus, redeemed when we consider it in the context of the promises to Abraham from sin and the law by Christ and welcomed into (Gal 3:14, 29) which Johnson considers merely spiritual.83 Payne the family of God. All now live in Christ, freed from rightly points out that all of the blessings to Abraham—and control by the principles of the world and heirs of through him to the covenant community—in Gen 12:2–3 are of a God’s promises to Abraham. No one is a second-class social and practical nature rather than only spiritual.84 citizen or excluded by ethnic-religious background, Further evidence of the functional nature of Gal 3:28 is seen economic status, or gender from any position or in the rabbinical prayer—a precursor of which was thought to privilege in the church.96 be behind the formulation of Gal 3:28—in which male Jews give thanks for not being born a Gentile, slave, or woman.85 What New creation therefore has an impact on our ethical conduct— is interesting is that members of these three groups did not how we interact with and treat each other in community. participate in study of Torah; thus the prayer emphasized how Love is the basis for right conduct in the Pauline writings. In Gal they were excluded from the opportunity of studying Torah. If 5:13–14,97 we are called to love each other by becoming like “slaves this prayer was being renounced by Paul, those who had formerly to one another”—in essence, we are asked to take on one of the been excluded from such activities would now be included.86 marginalized positions in Gal 3:28.98 The ethics of this love has no In his assertion that “role distinctions” are not eliminated place for ethnic, status, or gender discrimination in the church.99 in Gal 3:28, Johnson indicates that there are restrictions to what Rather, ungodly patriarchy is transformed “into patterns of active women can do in the church, including prohibitions on certain mutuality and solidarity.”100 If we hold true to Paul’s inspirational types of authoritative ministry and preaching.87 In restricting words in Gal 3:28, our ethics will assuredly be transformed.

26 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 Inheritance and the New Creation Vision historical movement—from Paul’s early efforts to bring about Concerning Gal 3:28, Mary Ann Tolbert says, “the open liberation for the Gentiles, to the massive endeavour leading to incorporation of believers of all races, ethnicities, and religious the nineteenth-century abolition of slavery. Now, in our time, backgrounds into full and equal partnership in the traditional we hear the call to work toward the liberation of women from contract of God to Abraham and the Jewish people was an act of the bonds keeping them subject to men including, sadly, in outrageous inclusivity.”101 It is a pity if this outrageousness is not the church.113 Such a trajectory will lead to the undermining taken to its full potential by those who are in Christ. and subversion of patriarchal systems in our world and in our Galatians 3:28 is contained within Paul’s exploration of churches that oppress and subjugate the marginalized.114 This adoption and inheritance. Therefore, when one limits the scope is the true work of God’s justice. What can we do other than to of Paul’s pronouncement of inheritance, it says something about heed this call? what that inheritance is. It is an insult to the loving Father who Notes adopts us and gives us inheritance to make it into something 1. Walter Brueggemann, The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and Challenge less than the vast and immeasurably good thing it is. Instead, let in Biblical Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977), 191. us fully implement Paul’s vision of unity and equal fellowship 2. Sandra Hack Polaski, A Feminist Introduction to Paul (St. Louis: in Christ.102 Chalice, 2005), 71. She goes on to observe the following: “If, as has often The vital message of new creation is heard throughout the been argued, the lower strata of society comprised the bulk of Paul’s congregations, then for males and females alike the promise of ‘adoption Galatian epistle—within the phrase arsen kai thēlu in Gal 3:28 as sons’ would sound as a word of hope, beyond the reality of their as well as the proclamation in Gal 6:15 that “a new creation is present physical circumstances. Freedom, responsibility, investment everything!”103 Fee suggests that an inclusive embrace of Gentiles with an inheritance—all these can only be promised to believers through is “deeply embedded” in the new creation context of Gal 6:15 and the gender-exclusive metaphor of sonship…. In Christ God offers all in the message of Galatians.104 This is certainly also true of Paul’s persons—Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female—the privileged letter to the Romans.105 status that can only be described as ‘sons of God’” (71–72). In the new creation, male and female become sisters and 3. C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London: A. & C. Black, 1962, 1991), 145. brothers,106 a family, a community, a “new humanity.”107 And in 4. Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “Is Galatians Just a ‘Guy Thing’? A this new kind of family, there is no place for a perspective that Theological Reflection,”Int 54, no. 3 (July 2000): 276. allows men to have sole authority over women.108 What does 5. Philip B. Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and have an important place in the new creation is an eschatological Theological Study of Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 94. table fellowship which proleptically brings the not yet into the 6. Brigitte Kahl, “No Longer Male: Masculinity Struggles behind already. Fee gives us a vivid picture: “In the gathered community Galatians 3:28?” JSNT 79 (2000): 41–42. 7. Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians (WBC; Dallas: Thomas Nelson, only ‘new creation’ practices are welcome: thus husbands and 1990), 159; Polaski, A Feminist Introduction, 82. wives, masters and slaves, Jew and Gentile all feast together in 8. James D. G. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians (BNTC; London: anticipation of the great final eschatological banquet.”109 A. & C. Black, 1993), 202. In Rom 8:14, the word is hosoi (“as many as”) And in the new creation community there is also inheritance. translated as “all who” in the NRSV. It is, as Kirk portrays it, “the resurrection glory of the new 9. Gordon Fee, Galatians: A Pentecostal Commentary (Dorset, UK: creation inheritance.”110 This inheritance will of course have Deo, 2007), 139–40. 10. Marianne Meye Thompson, “‘Mercy upon All’: God as Father in its consummation in the future renewal of all things. However, the Epistle to the Romans,” in Romans and the People of God: Essays in it undoubtedly also invades every aspect of Christian life and Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (ed. Sven community in the here and now. K. Soderlund and N. T. Wright; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 214; cf. Conclusion Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “Romans,” in The Women’s Bible Commentary (ed. Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe; Louisville: Westminster/John The promise is given to us as Abraham’s descendants that we Knox, 1992), 313. “would inherit the world” (Rom 4:13). If the word “only” needs 11. Brueggemann, The Land, 66; cf. J. R. Daniel Kirk, Unlocking Romans: to be used to describe this inheritance—that it only applies to Resurrection and the Justification of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 156, on the use of land to depict inheritance in Romans. Land is our salvation—then it is, indeed, a small world that we inherit. In a helpful way of understanding inheritance in Paul’s writings because of complete contrast, the letters of Paul show our inheritance to be its this-worldly nature and the expectation of “living faithfully in history” vast and infinite, invading every area of our lives and the life of (Brueggemann, The Land, 178). the church of Christ. It is a world where “there is no longer Jew or 12. Thompson, “‘Mercy upon All,’” 206. Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and 13. J. Paul Sampley highlights the “slave to son to heir” chain in these female; for all [of us] are one in Christ Jesus.” It is a “new creation two texts: Sampley, “Romans and Galatians: Comparison and Contrast,” in Understanding the Word: Essays in Honour of Bernhard W. Anderson (ed. inheritance”111 that is meant for all. Anything less shrinks the James T. Butler et al.; Sheffield: JSOT, 1985), 316; cf. Fee,Galatians , 156. world we inherit for both women and men and is thus an insult 14. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, 208; Fee, Galatians, 144; to the Giver of this good gift. Leon Morris, Galatians: Paul’s Charter of Christian Freedom (Downers As stewards of God’s good gift of inheritance we are called Grove: InterVarsity, 1996), 124; Letty M. Russell, “Unto the Thousandth to move forward, to work together as women and men in Christ Generation,” in Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children (ed. Phyllis Trible and toward the full implementation of Paul’s spectacular vision in Letty M. Russell; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 3–4. 15. Carolyn Osiek, “Galatians,” in The Women’s Bible Commentary (ed. Gal 3:28.112 Jim Reiher tells us that, looking back, we can see a Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe; Louisville: Westminster John

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 • 27 Knox, 1992), 334. Osiek points out that, with this term, daughters are given Theology?” inGender, Tradition and Romans: Shared Ground, Uncertain an equal inheritance status with sons that they would not otherwise have. Borders (ed. Christina Grenholm and Daniel Patte; New York: T & T Elizabeth A. Castelli, on the other hand, contends that the use of gender- Clark, 2005), 238. exclusive inheritance terms has the effect—although not necessarily 36. Brigitte Kahl, “Gender Trouble in Galatia? Paul and the Rethinking intentional—of marginalizing women: Castelli, “Romans,” in Searching the of Difference,” inIs There a Future for Feminist Theology? (ed. Deborah Scriptures, Volume Two: A Feminist Commentary (ed. Elisabeth Schüssler F. Sawyer and Diane M. Collier; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999), 71. Fiorenza; New York: Crossroad, 1994), 291. 37. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 179. 16. N. T. Wright, “New Exodus, New Inheritance: The Narrative 38. Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ, 83. Substructure of Romans 3–8,” in Romans and the People of God: Essays in 39. Boyarin, “Paul and the Genealogy,” 20; Kahl, “No Longer Male,” Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (ed. Sven K. 48; cf. Kahl, “Gender Trouble,” 71. Soderlund and N. T. Wright; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 30. 40. Fee, Galatians, 140. 17. Kirk, Unlocking Romans, 156. “Those who are in Christ will see with 41. Fee, Galatians, 141; Snodgrass, “Galatians 3:28,” 177. Kahl refers to their eyes the consummation of God’s love for them in the resurrection circumcision as an “exclusively male” issue (“No Longer Male,” 38). glory of the new creation inheritance.” 42. Fee, Galatians, 141; cf. Payne, Man and Woman, 93; Schüssler 18. Kirk, Unlocking Romans, 136, 145; Wright, “New Exodus,” 31. Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 210. Robert Atkins points out the 19. Kirk, Unlocking Romans, 9. “universality of baptism as an entrance ritual”: Atkins, Egalitarian 20. Gordon Fee, “Male and Female in the New Creation: Galatians Community: Ethnography and Exegesis (Tuscaloosa: University of 3:26–29,” in Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Alabama Press, 1991), 117. Hierarchy (ed. Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis; Downers 43. Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 210. Grove: InterVarsity, 2005), 174. 44. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 41. 21. Payne, Man and Woman, 82. 45. The background material on Abraham for Gal 3:23–4:7 is given 22. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the earlier in Gal 3. Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1982), 188. 46. The background material on Abraham for Rom 8:14–25 is given 23. Wayne A. Meeks, First Urban Christians: The Social World of the in Rom 4. Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 96. 47. Pamela Eisenbaum, “A Remedy for Having Been Born Woman: 24. Gaventa identifies this as a central purpose of Romans (“Romans,” Jesus, Gentiles, and Genealogy in Romans,” in Gender, Tradition and 315). Fee observes that, in Galatians, “through the work of Christ and Romans: Shared Ground, Uncertain Borders (ed. Christina Grenholm the gift of the Spirit ... the ground has been leveled” between Jewish and and Daniel Patte; New York: T & T Clark, 2005), 112–13. Gentile believers (“Male and Female,” 174). 48. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 41. The repeated overturning of 25. The impartiality of God is brought out in both Galatians and primogeniture in the OT also assists in the subversion of any reliance on Romans (Meeks, First Urban Christians, 168). An example in Galatians patrilineal descent (Kahl, “Gender Trouble,” 69). would of course be Gal 3:28. 49. Eisenbaum, “A Remedy,” 116. 26. Trevor J. Burke, Adopted Into God’s Family: Exploring a Pauline 50. Eisenbaum, “A Remedy,” 123. Metaphor (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2006), 115. 51. Kahl, “Gender Trouble,” 68. 27. Thompson, “‘Mercy upon All,’” 207–9. 52. Jeanne Stevenson-Moessner, The Spirit of Adoption: At Home in 28. Thompson, “‘Mercy upon All,’” 215. God’s Family (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 108. This is 29. One example is Gordon Fee who says that this passage “has true even if Gal 4:4 is not referring to the virgin birth, as noted by Morris, altogether to do with the inclusion of Gentiles as full and equal Galatians, 215; Osiek, “Galatians,” 334–35. Paul, in any case, is clear members of the people of God” (Fee, “Male and Female,” 175). Cf. Fee, throughout the rest of Galatians and Romans that human male biology is Galatians, 78–79; Daniel Boyarin, “Paul and the Genealogy of Gender,” simply not necessary in the descent of Christ. in A Feminist Companion to Paul (ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marianne 53. Stevenson-Moessner, The Spirit of Adoption, 110. Stevenson- Blickenstaff; London: T & T Clark, 2004), 22; Longenecker, Galatians, 65, Moessner shows how adoption is contrasted with the OT concept of the 72; Meeks, First Urban Christians, 161; Morris, Galatians, 81; Payne, Man male seed (103). and Woman, One in Christ, 86; Jim Reiher, “Galatians 3:28—Liberating 54. Kahl, “Gender Trouble,” 72. for Women’s Ministry? Or of Limited Application?” ExpTim 123, no. 6 55. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 42–43. (2012): 274; Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her: A Feminist 56. Osiek, “Galatians,” 336. “Perhaps a man willing to use such an Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins (New York: Crossroad, image is not as alienated from women’s experience as Paul is often made 1983), 210; Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Galatians 3:28: Conundrum or Solution,” out to be.” in Women, Authority and the Bible (ed. Alvera Mickelsen; Downers 57. Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “Our Mother St. Paul: Toward the Grove: InterVarsity, 1986), 176; Hal Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Recovery of a Neglected Theme,” in A Feminist Companion to Paul Meal: Social Experimentation and Early Christian Identity (Minneapolis: (ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marianne Blickenstaff; London: T & T Clark, Fortress, 2009), 74. 2004), 96. Gaventa observes here that, “when Paul presents himself as a 30. F. F. Bruce, Paul, Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids: mother, he voluntarily hands over the authority of a patriarch in favor of Eerdmans, 1977), 177–78. a role that will bring him shame, the shame of a female-identified male. 31. Longenecker, Galatians, 65 Still, maternal imagery becomes effective precisely because it plays on 32. Fee, Galatians, 79; Morris, Galatians, 81; Reiher, “Galatians 3:28,” hierarchical expectations.” Gaventa (90) notes that, other than when he 274. calls God Father, Paul uses motherhood imagery more frequently than 33. Boyarin, “Paul and the Genealogy of Gender,” 22. father imagery. 34. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 74. 58. Polaski, A Feminist Introduction, 24–25. 35. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 174; cf. 71 and 146. In the 59. Burke, Adopted Into God’s Family, 186; Gaventa, “Romans,” 318. context of Rom 14–15, which also deals with food and meal issues in 60. Polaski, A Feminist Introduction, 84–85. relation to Jewish and Gentile differences, Kathy Ehrensperger finds a 61. Gaventa, “Our Mother St. Paul,” 93. “concrete testing ground of what otherwise would be a purely theoretical 62. Gaventa, “Our Mother St. Paul,” 94–95. This is particularly true faith.” Such a faith “is either practical or it is nothing at all”: Ehrensperger, of Gal 4:19. “New Perspectives on Paul: New Perspectives on Romans in Feminist 63. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 38; cf. Briggs, “Galatians,” 218.

28 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 64. Snodgrass, “Galatians 3:28,” 161, 168. James Dunn likewise observes that “it is highly unlikely that he would 65. Gal 3:18, 3:29, 4:1, 4:7. have allowed gender or social status as such, any more than race, to 66. Johnson, “Role Distinctions,” 159; cf. 163 where he states, “All are constitute a barrier against any service of the gospel” (The Epistle to equal in Christ, the church, and family, but the phrase, ‘in Christ,’ refers the Galatians, 207). to the mystical and universal, the representative and covenantal union of 91. Payne, Man and Woman, 89. all believers in the Lord.” Johnson’s position is extremely problematic. His 92. Jewett mentions the women of Rom 16 in this regard (Man as Male dualistic view of Gal 3:28 denies the impact of being “in Christ” in daily and Female, 145). life. Another concern with Johnson is his repeated and overconfident 93. The concept of women’s “full participation” in church life and assertion that his is “the historic orthodox interpretation of the text” (154; ministry is one that Payne repeatedly emphasizes (Man and Woman, 81, cf. 163, 164). Schüssler Fiorenza is correct in stating that “malestream 93, 97; cf. 85, 99). exegesis has sought to explain away Gal. 3:28’s radical theological claim 94. Payne says of the new creation theme in Galatians that it is “always to equality or to evaporate it”: Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Rhetoric and pointing to the new life in Christ lived through the Spirit” (Man and Ethic: The Politics of Biblical Studies (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 149. Woman, 92). 67. Longenecker, Galatians, 157. 95. Payne, Man and Woman, 92–93. Inexplicably, Johnson finds 68. W. Ward Gasque, “Response” (to Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Galatians support for the idea of the “distinction between male and female” in the 3:28: Conundrum or Solution?”), in Women, Authority and the Bible (ed. creation account, whereas Gen 1:27 emphasizes that male and female Alvera Mickelsen; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1986), 189. have the same role (“Role Distinctions,”159–60). 69. Snodgrass, “Galatians 3:28,” 178; cf. Fee, “Male and Female,” 176; 96. Payne, Man and Woman, 104. Payne, Man and Woman, 79. 97. cf. Rom 13:8–10. 70. Snodgrass, “Galatians 3:28,” 179. 98. Gasque, referring also to Gal 5:1, declares the following: “There is 71. Polaski, A Feminist Introduction, 75; Fee, “Male and Female,” 174. a law higher than the law of liberty: it is the law of love” (“Response,” 191). 72. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, 207; Fee, “Male and Female,” 99. Payne, Man and Woman, 101; cf. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 47, who 177, n. 11; Payne, Man and Woman, 85, 86; Reiher, “Galatians 3:28,” 276. highlights Gal 5:6: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor 73. Fee, “Male and Female,” 177, n. 11. uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith 74. Johnson, “Role Distinctions,” 161. working through love” (NRSV). 75. Payne, Man and Woman, 102; cf. Reiher, “Galatians 3:28,” 276–77. 100. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 46. 76. Paul K. Jewett, Man as Male and Female: A Study in Sexual 101. Mary Ann Tolbert, “A New Teaching with Authority: A Re- Relationships from a Theological Point of View (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, evaluation of the Authority of the Bible,” Teaching the Bible: The Discourses 1975), 144. and Politics of Biblical Pedagogy, eds. Fernando F. Segovia and Mary Ann 77. Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 213. Tolbert (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1998), 184–85. 78. Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 218; cf. Fee, “Male and 102. Jewett, Man as Male and Female, 147. Female,” 180. 103. Gaventa, “Is Galatians,” 278. 79. See also Rom 10:12, 1 Cor 7:19, 2 Cor 5:16-17, Gal 6:15, Eph 2:11-16. 104. Fee, “Male and Female,” 177. 80. Payne, Man and Woman, 80; cf. Bruce, Epistle to the Galatians, 105. Fee, “Male and Female,” 177, n. 13. Fee observes that Rom 15 shows 189. that “the eschatological inclusion of the Gentiles with Jews as one people 81. Kahl, “No Longer Male,” 39. of God [is] its main point.” Longenecker observes that the renewal of 82. Fee, “Male and Female,” 174, n. 5; Reiher, “Galatians 3:28,” 272. God’s people and the entire creation in Christ and the Spirit is a major 83. Johnson, “Role Distinctions,” 163. theme of Romans 5–8 (Introducing Romans, 408); cf. Polaski, A Feminist 84.Payne, Man and Woman, 98. Introduction, 90. 85. Bruce, Epistle to the Galatians, 187. There is also a similar Greek 106. Polaski, A Feminist Introduction, 91. parallel to this prayer. 107. Fee, “Male and Female,” 185; Gasque, “Response,” 189. 86. Payne, Man and Woman, 84, 85. 108. Fee, “Male and Female,” 185. Fee asserts that such a “male-authority 87. Johnson, “Role Distinctions,” 160, cf. 162. Thomas Schreiner sees viewpoint . . . reject[s] the new creation in favor of the norms of a fallen the Bible as forbidding “the regular teaching and preaching of God’s word” w or l d .” for women: Schreiner, “Women in Ministry: Another Complementarian 109. Fee, “Male and Female,” 182. Perspective,” in Two Views of Women in Ministry (ed. James R. Beck; 110. Kirk, Unlocking Romans, 156; cf. Kahl, “Gender Trouble,” 67–68, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005), 277. Douglas Moo claims that the for how resurrection is associated with the concept of new creation in prohibition to teaching he observes in 1 Tim 2:12 applies also to preaching: Galatians. Moo, “What Does It Mean Not to Teach or Have Authority Over Men? 111. Kirk, Unlocking Romans, 156. 1 Timothy 2:11–15,” in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (ed. 112. Jewett, Man as Male and Female, 147. John Piper and Wayne Grudem; Wheaton: Crossway, 2006), 186. 113. Reiher, “Galatians 3:28,” 273; cf. Tolbert, “A New Teaching with 88. “Those excluding women from church leadership either assume Authority,” 185. that God never gives women certain gifts of the Spirit such as teaching 114. Fee, “Male and Female,” 183: “This does not abolish the system, and administration, or they restrict the use of those gifts even though but carried through by Philemon, it dismantles the significance given to Paul explains that the gifts are for the common good” (Payne, Man and it (and in this indirect way, of course, heads toward the dismantling of Woman, 99). In addition, we know that women were using their ministry the system itself!).” gifts in the early churches (Gasque, “Response,” 190–91). Rom 16 gives a helpful snapshot of such ministering women, with Phoebe the deacon and benefactor (16:1-2), Junia the apostle (16:7), and Prisca (16:3), Mary CAROLINE SCHLEIER CUTLER is a PhD student (16:6), Tryphaena, Tryphosa and Persis (16:12) who are all described as in Biblical Studies at McMaster Divinity College co-workers in Paul’s mission. in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. She lives with her 89. Payne, Man and Woman, 97. supportive husband in Windsor, Ontario, and is 90. Susie C. Stanley, “Response” (to Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Galatians extremely proud of her two adult children. Her 3:28: Conundrum or Solution?”), in Women, Authority and the Bible paper was co-winner of the 2015 CBE Student Paper Competition (ed. Alvera Mickelsen; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1986), 181–82. in Los Angeles.

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 30, No. 2 ◆ Spring 2016 • 29